Tuesday, January 23, 2007

The Insights of Georgia Goslee

I’m not familiar with the North Carolina statutes.--Abrams Report, 18 May 2006There was evidence of DNA of Seligmann [sic]who lived in that house [sic].

--Tucker, 7 August 2006

Among the dozens of talking heads who have appeared on the lacrosse case, three stand out: Nancy Grace, a demagogue who contends that everyone charged is automatically guilty; the ready-to-slander Wendy Murphy; and a heretofore obscure Maryland lawyer named Georgia Goslee.

The first two were on the case from the start, but Goslee didn’t make her first appearance until late April. Mike Nifong’s case was already showing signs of imploding; anyone with half a brain wouldn’t enthusiastically defend him. Goslee, however, was willing, even eager, to do so.

A graduate of CoppinState who obtained a J.D. from the University of Maryland, Goslee brought a wide array of talents to her new role. In addition to running a one-person law firm, she is a certified health/fitness instructor and certified personal trainer. (Something to fall back on, apparently.) She also hosted a diet workshop series on a Baltimore TV station, and appeared in an unspecified fashion on the Montel Williams Show. Though Goslee was regularly described as a former federal prosecutor, her website doesn’t make clear when she served in that role, or how many cases she tried.

---------

During her three-month run as a commentator, Goslee distinguished herself for making transparently absurd comments on the law.

27 April: The victim in this case, I mean she has been brutally assaulted. And to hold her testimony even at this time to hard and fast specific time periods I think is a little unfair . . . . For God’s sakes this poor woman may still be wallowing under a cloud.

A flustered Dan Abrams replied, “So you would rather that we just say you know what, she’s making this allegation. Let’s not get into specifics here.”

The same day, defense attorney Yale Galanter pointed to Reade Seligmann’s alibi, noting that “phone records do not lie. Bank records do not lie.” Goslee was not deterred: “I’m not so sure about that.”

The 6th amendment right to a speedy trial was not a favorite of Goslee’s.

18 May: I’m just so perplexed as to why this particular case wants—the defense wants to rush it through . . . If they don’t need more time, perhaps the state’s attorney needs more time.

The release of Kim Roberts’ statement—which showed a version of events consistent with that of the captains’ statement and utterly inconsistent with that of the accuser—did not perturb Goslee.

9 June: You know, one of the problems you guys attach is consistency and inconsistency.

This person who described herself as a former prosecutor articulated an extraordinarily low bar for the standard a prosecutor should employ in deciding whether or not to move forward with a case.

19 June: If you can’t call her a liar, then maybe there’s some credibility . . . to what she’s saying even though she’s inconsistent.

As noted in one of the header quotes, Goslee admitted early on in the case that she didn’t know North Carolina law. She seemed particularly unaware that in 2004, the state had passed an open discovery statute.

24 May: How many times do you go to court, even though you’re required by law . . . to give up the exculpatory evidence, you are never going to reveal everything you have.

23 June: If you look at the resolve of Nifong, who is a seasoned prosecutor . . . they simply had not turned over everything, because you never give up everything.

And, when all else failed, the former federal prosecutor cited conspiracy theories.

7 August: I remember reading a story that the accuser’s mother said that she was a little concerned that the DNA didn’t show up because it was actually tested by some of the people involved at DukeUniversity. I’m not saying that’s the case. That’s what the mother of the accuser has said.

---------

To a greater extent than any other TV commentator, Goslee displayed an almost reverential attitude toward Nifong.

9 May: I think Mike Nifong, I think he’s a pretty smart guy. And . . . while he may not have a real hot smoking gun, I think he knows much more than we know.

18 May: I think that Mr. Nifong is doing actually a great job.

24 May: In the long run, we’re going to see and you know we keep saying it, it may not be a smoking gun, but I think there’s some seriously incriminating evidence.

5 June: Listen. No, he would not . . . have indicted these guys [without evidence]. He’s not a neophyte prosecutor.

19 June: I talk to people—lots of people almost daily from Durham [Goslee lives in Maryland] and they are not outraged. They are not upset.

---------

Much like Wendy Murphy, Goslee proved ready, willing, and able to invent evidence or make wholly unfounded speculation to substantiate Nifong’s case.

8 May: She’s been obviously brutally beaten and there were obvious bruises on her.

In fact, the SANE nurse-in-training’s report said that the accuser had non-bleeding scratches on her heel and knee. As this fact publicly emerged, Goslee simply changed her theory, making the fantastic claim that as the “complexion of the victim in this case who was raped is a dark complected African American woman,” medical personnel (in a city that’s 38 percent African-American) would not have known how to detect bruises on the accuser.

8 May: I think as this case continues to develop, Dan, I think we’re going to see maybe— there may be other women who are coming forward on Duke and other campuses around the country.

No grounds for this speculation, of course, existed.

24 May: You have physicians who are saying that the incident or the allegation she’s made, they’re consistent with being raped.

In fact, no physician had said any such thing.

5 June: All of those gentlemen that were in that house that night when that rape occurred, somebody else knows something . . . Other guys in that house that night knows something . . . And they may be withholding evidence.

No grounds for this speculation, of course, existed.

7 August: She he was offered $2 million, Tucker. And why would she be offered $2 million by the Duke alumni if nothing happened?

In fact, the accuser had unequivocally denied this assertion to Durham police.

---------

Even broken clocks are accurate twice a day, and occasionally Goslee would stumble onto a pertinent question. When she did so, however, she proved unable to process the information.

5 June: If there were no vaginal tears, what was the basis of the indictment for the original medical examination . . . her examination was consistent with . . . forcible rape?

19 June: Why is [Nifong] prosecuting a case if he has no evidence?

---------

In the end, Goslee was undone by her habit of simply inventing evidence to substantiate Nifong’s claims. A few minutes after she made the bizarre assertion about Reade Seligmann’s DNA quoted in the header, show host Tucker Carlson broke into another segment:

I just want to make something absolutely clear. In our conversation with Georgia Goslee a moment ago about the Duke rape hoax, she alleged—or appeared to allege; she was speaking pretty quickly—that Reade Seligman’s DNA . . . was either found on the victim or at the scene.

As I attempted to make clear, that is completely untrue. And it is completely untrue. So I just want to make totally clear, Reade Seligman’s DNA was not found, so far as we know, anyway—so far as anybody knows—on the accuser. Totally false.

It appears as if this invented claim was the final straw for Goslee’s career as a cable news commentator. A Lexis/Nexis search indicates that she has not made a case-related appearance since August 7.

[Update, 9.34am: A commenter notes that, contrary to my last remark, Goslee resurfaced! She was on the "Lineup," on FOX, a couple of weeks back. The transcript didn't appear in my Lexis search. As far as I know, MSNBC hasn't used her again.]

Victoria Peterson - Asserted that the DNA evidence had been tampered with without any evidenceChan Hall - Suggested explicitly that a guilty verdict, regardless of the evidence, should be issued in order to make up for past injusticesNew Black Panther Party - Where do I begin?Sgt. Gottlieb - Straight from memory notes that contradicted contemporaneous notes of another office and the ER nurse's testimonyGeorgia Goslee - this article.

Sorry I hit send too quickly in my 12:42 post. The LS post attributes the hit piece to "UBUNTU." But I guess I am too new to know what that means. I also realize this question is not directly relevant to Georgia Goslee, but I thought the news seemed important nonetheless.gk

To M. Simon:The thread is in the LieStopper Discussion Board and it is the "UBUNTU" topic that was posted by Wayne Fontes (who probably is not the same Wayne Fontes who coached, poorly, the Detroit Lions a few years ago).gk

~U Defense attorneys can spin, distort, and omit facts while the prosecution must remain silent until trail.

Over the past nine months, the public has been exposed to the partial disclosure of facts along with speculation, misinformation, biased interpretation and strategic maneuvering by the defense. This has led to a distorted public perception of many of the facts in the case. Principally at work in this perception has been the defense attorneys' strategy of revealing only selected portions of the evidence, excluding many important details and withholding other relevant and significant information. This kind of strategy becomes the basis for much of our public information and unfortunately for what we think is the truth in the case.

The current public impressions of the `facts' in this case primarily result from procedural rules that effectively allow the defense to selectively discuss and sometimes distort, certain pieces ofevidence, while the prosecutor may not discuss the case at all ~V not even to rebut false accusations. For example, the defense can disclose evidence that they believe is helpful to the defense but refuse to disclose evidence that proves their clients' guilt.

The same is not true for the prosecution because if the prosecutor reveals the strength of his case, the defense can complain that this unfairly taints the jury pool or causes too much prejudicial pre-trial publicity. If the judge agrees, he can punish the prosecutorby suppressing evidence or dismissing the charges.

But when defense attorneys unfairly taint the jury pool against the interests of the victim, there are no similar sanctions against them because a judge cannot punish the accused for the bad behavior of his lawyer. For these reasons, the public's awareness of evidence is almost always favorable to the accused and far from a fulldisclosure of the truth.

DECEMBER 2006 HEARING

In December 2006, the judge handling the case conducted a hearing to determine what if any DNA material found during a rape kit examination should be disclosed to the defense. The defense arguedthey should be allowed access to all information indicating the victim had prior sexual contact with men other than the defendants because they hoped to provide the jury with an alternativeexplanation for the victim's vaginal injuries.

The judge agreed and ruled that the rape kit results be turned over to the defense.

In response to this development, two things happened:

Defense attorneys for the accused stated that the prosecutor, Mike Nifong, had been unethical to withhold such `exculpatory' evidence. They called for him to drop all charges in the case and spoke publicly against his conduct as DA. Within days, a letter was sentto the US Department of Justice suggesting that a federal investigation be initiated against Nifong for violating the civil rights of the defendants.

In fact in the spring of 2006, the defense had been made aware thatno DNA matching the three defendants was found in the rape kitevidence.

One can argue that Nifong's withholding of this information was proper because the victim's sexual history, like the sexual history of the defendants, is constitutionally protected privateinformation. It is improper for any prosecutor to disclose this information without a hearing at which a judge must make a ruling to decide whether sexual history is relevant to an issue in dispute.

The reason for the DNA hearing was for the judge to make determination regarding the release of information on the DNA material. Legal procedure and laws protecting sexual privacy require that a judge make such determinations, not the prosecutor. Nifong did not violate anyone's constitutional rights by not revealing such information until the judge made a decision on the DNA evidence.

Why didn't the defense file an appeal to the North Carolina Appellate Court or the NC Supreme Court if they really thought the DA had violated the defendants' rights?

In fact, if there were any truth to the defense's claim that Nifong's handling of the issue violated the constitution, they would have sought sanctions from the judge that handled the motion and ifthey were correct, the judge would have at least criticized the DA, or sanctioned him in some manner, but he did no such thing. And if the defense truly believed Nifong violated some procedure or law, and the judge declined to issue sanctions, they would have appealed to a higher state court in North Carolina, or even to the AttorneyGeneral in North Carolina. They did not do so.

Defense attorneys are well aware of their right to ask the judge who handled the DNA issue to punish Nifong for suppressing evidence by dismissing charges; the fact that they did not complain to the judge strongly suggests an obvious understanding on their part that Nifong did nothing wrong. Instead a letter was written to federal authorities, accompanied by indignant protestations, by the defense team and those sympathetic to the defense. This situation suggests an overall defense strategy aimed at putting the prosecution on the defensive and manipulating the court of public opinion.

After the judge ruled the defense could obtain the other men's DNA, DA Nifong dropped one of three charges against the defendants the charge of rape, which in North Carolina refers to penile/vaginalpenetration ONLY. All other forms of penetration including vaginalpenetration by something other than a penis, is covered by the equally serious felony called "sexual offense".

By dropping this one charge, Nifong loses nothing because the remaining sexual crime, called "sexual offense" in North Carolina, carries the same punishment as rape. But he may benefitstrategically because with no vaginal rape charge, the defense cannot use the other men's DNA at trial as they no longer have a need to "explain" the victim's vaginal injuries.

To the defense's charge that Mike Nifong withheld `exculpatory' evidence, two points should be made.

1. Every DA in the country knows that information about a victim's past sexual activity should never be revealed unless and until a judge decides that disclosure is necessary. To do otherwisewould be to violate a victim's constitutionally protected sexual privacy without due process.

2. Defense attorneys argue that the DNA was exculpatory evidence that excluded or exonerated their clients. But the fact is that most rape cases involve no DNA evidence. Furthermore, the other men's DNA in this case doesn't necessarily reveal anything about thenight in question. The DNA may consist of partial strands, old sperms cells, degraded biological material or other substances that clearly predate the incident by weeks or months. It is common for sperm cells to survive even multiple launderings and it is unclearwhether the DNA from other men was found inside the victim or on herunderpants.

Critics of Nifong argue that he should drop all the charges because he doesn't have a strong enough case

We must remind ourselves that it is possible that there is additional evidence that has not yet been revealed although the defense and defense-friendly pundits frequently assert on television that Nifong has nothing. The actual discovery documents turned over to the defense number in the many thousands of pages, yet approximately a thousand pages have been withheld by the defense. That is, the defense has shared some, but not all of the evidence provided to them by the prosecutor. It is also possible that Nifong has eyewitness testimony from some of the defendants' friends giventhat more than 30 other men were present at the time of the incident. There may even be photographs of the incident itself given that we've seen "before" and "after" photos. Since all theinformation is not available pre-trial, we know that more facts will be revealed when the prosecutor is legally permitted to elicit testimony and introduce evidence.

Critics complain that this case is ruining the lives of the defendants and it should be ended

A good point to make on this topic relates to the issue generally known as "speedy trial" rights. All accused enjoy a constitutional right to a speedy trial under the due process clause of the 14thAmendment of the US Constitution. States differ on the mechanics of how defendants file for the enforcement of speedy trial rights, but the simple point is the defense COULD demand an immediate trial, right now but they're not. Delaying a trial is a well-knowndefense strategy because memories can fade, witnesses might move away, evidence might get lost, and the opportunity for media manipulation is prolonged. In short if this were truly a weak case with no evidence, the defense would be pushing for a speedy trial.

Public perception is that the victim has no credibility.

Here again it is important to remember that it is in the best interest of the defense to discredit the victim as a money-seeking opportunist, and to do so publicly in the pre-trial period. Thisstrategy can work to undermine, humiliate, and discourage the victimfrom proceeding with the prosecution, and impact the jury pool.

The defense would have the public believe that this was a falsereport made to get money, but remember that according to a well- sourced news report by the Wilmington Journal in June 2006, the victim rejected a payment of over 2 million dollars last spring toback out of the case.

It is not unusual for there to be minor inconsistencies in victims recalling traumatic events. We know that trauma and confusion are frequently the consequences of rape, and that in the case of a gang rape, the trauma and confusion would be great. Additionally, there is some indication that the victim may have been drugged; there werereports of her going from sober to totally unaware and then back tonot-intoxicated by the time she reached the hospital.

The main point to remember is that undermining the credibility of

the victim in the pre-trial period continues to be a consistent strategy for a defense victory.

Criticism has surfaced concerning the fact that Nifong did not interview and talk to the victim.

We do not know the history of his interaction, or his offices'interaction with the victim, but in fact, in general it is soundpolicy for a prosecutor to limit or refrain from such personal interviews at the risk of becoming a witness ~V which would disqualify him from serving as the prosecutor. In general we shouldskeptically consider any criticism of the DA by the defense, thatwould obviously benefit from his disqualification.

That site about the AV is from Ubuntu, Sam Hummel's group which is greatly responsible for the potbanging protests and the vigilante poster. They seem to be deciding between two ways to defend themselves: still claiming the crime did happen, or claiming that their protests were more about social issues of racism, sexism, etc. instead of being an actual crime. I don't think either defense will work when the lawsuits start.

'Recommended' sample letter to the editor provided by national sexual violence resource center.

Dear Editor,The public continues to receive information and misinformation on the Duke LacrosseTeam Rape Case, clearly via the media, but mostly originating from biased assertions andstrategies of defense attorneys in the case. We at the (name of your organization) feelcompelled to offer a few words of perspective while encouraging everyone to understandthat importance and impact of the criminal justice process on all of us.Legal commentators on this case have asserted that the evidence will not support aconviction. It is inappropriate and victim-blaming to make such an assertion until all thefacts have been disclosed at trial. Some also claim that District Attorney Mike Nifonghas acted unethically and that he should not proceed with a case because he has noevidence. It is important that we remember that in a pre-trial period, the defense canselectively discuss certain pieces of information, even distort and misstate informationwith essentially no sanctions. In recent years, particularly in high-profile cases, the trendhas been for defense attorneys to use this pre-trial period to launch a strategic mediacampaign to intimidate victims and witnesses and to compromise the jury pool. It shouldbe remembered that undermining the credibility of the victim in this pre-trial periodcontinues to be one of the most fruitful ways for the defense to win its case.The prosecutor is not free to say anything about the case until trial, including even anystatements to rebut false claims and misinformation. In this particular case, we know thatthere is a substantial amount of information in the discovery documents (approximatelyone thousand pages) that the defense has not revealed or discussed. Yet they selectivelygive information and generally continue to assert there is no evidence.We must remember that there are many rape victims that may be discouraged, in fact,literally fearful of reporting the crime to police based on what they see happening inNorth Carolina. The justice system in North Carolina has a responsibility to respectfullyand professionally determine what happened on the night in question. Both the victim andthe defendants deserve their day in court, and justice, real justice demands it.Very truly yours,Signature

UBUNTU was born in the aftermath of the March 13, 2006 [non]rape of a Durham, North Carolina black woman by members of the Duke University lacrosse team. UBUNTU is a women of color and survivor-led coalition with both individual and organizational members. We prioritize the voices, analyses, and needs of women of color and survivors of sexual violence. We are women, men, transgender people, and people who do not fit into the gender binary. We are people of color, multi-racial, and white. We come from throughout the Triangle area and have roots both within and outside of the United States. We are sex workers, students, and community members. We are workers. We are lesbian, gay, bisexual,.......

DURHAM -- District Attorney Mike Nifong has obtained a reprieve on filing a response to N.C. State Bar allegations that he violated four ethical rules in his handling of the Duke lacrosse sex-offense case, including a rule that prohibits "dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation" by lawyers.

Nifong originally was required to answer the complaint within 20 days of the date it was served, Jan. 3.

But his response apparently won't be submitted today.

David Freedman of Winston-Salem, Nifong's lawyer, said Monday an extension of time has been granted. He said he didn't have the new deadline at his fingertips.....

This is a serious question from someone unfamiliar with the legal profession. It has nothing to do with the possible substantive merits of what Ms. Goslee has to say. How is it possible that a person incapable of stringing together two or three complete and correct English sentences can gain the accreditation necessary to practice law? I knew that habeas corpus was becoming a dead letter in the state of Maryland, but the suspension of the rule of agreement between subject and predicate takes me by surprise.

I'm afraid Orrin Starn [Forum, Jan. 17] picked on the wrong blogger when he showed us one of "many" gaffes the bad K.C. Johnson supposedly published. The African-American Studies Web site lists 14 professors, assistant professors and associate professors. Let's get Starn to list a few more of Johnson's mistakes and one-sided "stories." Starn's example was silly and irrelevant. Loved the KC and the Sunshine Band reference, though.

Johnson has apparently exposed too many weaknesses involving the non-rape case. His common sense is a little too extaordinary for the Group of 88 to stomach as well. It is only natural that Starn would try to discredit Johnson. Starn should try separating the wheat from the chaff. I can do it with a high school education. But since you want to play silly with us, Johnson is the wheat. The chaff are the uneducated racists who email Group of 88 members with the uncalled-for or ugly diatribes. Or the almost-but-not-quite racist Group of 88.

I hope everyone will read Prof. Anderson's article on LewRockwell.com. It is a terrific piece discussing the costs of this hoax to the families and to the bloggers.

To KC, Prof Anderson and the other bloggers. I realize that you have given personal time to cover this case. You have done a real service to the families, everyone who cares about justice and the public at large. Thanks.

Even though much of your work has not been compensated, I think you have not only exposed the NC criminal justice system, but also the MSM. The MSM has shown itself to be completely incompetent. I know that those outlets rue the day that the blogosphere was born. Ultimately, the impact of the blogosphere will be to pull the MSM back to the center. Otherwise they will not be able to compete.

Re Goslee, Murphy et al (very few al): Dan Abrams, when asked (I THINK by Tucker) "is there really anybody who believes that this case is credible?" answered "there are three or four but we just bring them on these shows as pinatas."

From what I understand, she did not make her claims until Tara Levicy asked her if she had been raped. That did not occur in the parking lot.

The Cash article sounds pretty much like Wendy Murphy's piece that appeared in the Wilmington Journal. I find it very interesting that the black "leadership" in Durham and elsewhere is demanding that exculpatory evidence be ignored.

Remember, it was the North Carolina NAACP that was involved in the exoneration of Darryl Hunt, yet, the exculpatory evidence for him was almost identical to what we see in the Duke case. If the NAACP and Cash Michaels were to demand the shifting "DNA-does-not-matter" standards in the Hunt case, as well as other cases, including the recent one in Texas, then Hunt still would be in prison.

I wish that Cash understood the real danger he is creating for black defendants, but my guess is that his racial animosity is so great and he hates whites so much that he is willing to see innocent black men convicted just so the three young men from Duke can go to jail.

This is just plain evil, in my book. But I also will say that Cash and the NAACP and others have lost any moral standing to speak of things like wrongful conviction, DNA exoneration, and the like.

Somewhat off-topic: A small but dedicated cadre of dead-enders in this thread at the well-known weblog Pandagon have continued to come up with more and more excuses as to how the charges might, somehow, be true:

Dear Georgia Goslee:Please read the following between Duke Lacrosse Lawyer, Brad Bannon and Dr. Meehan,DNA lab founder and DNA identity expert. This information is not difficult to come by on the internet

MR. BANNON. And those male characteristics—if I’m not correct, please tell me if I’m not—indicate that there’s more than one male’s DNA there; is that correct?

DR. MEEHAN. That’s correct.

MR. BANNON. And all of those DNA characteristics were compared to all of the reference suspects’ swabs in this case; is that correct?

Follow the money. Feminist ideologues like Goslee don't spring up out of thin air.

Just have a look at the VAWA which is a federally funded billion dollar river that is the feminist's dream and any falsely accused man's nightmare. The VAWA is a part of the problem with the Duke case. Here's a brief article showing some of the problems.

I was a part of an effort in the summer of 05 to bring some fairness to this misandrist law. There were to be hearings on Capitol Hill regarding the renewal of VAWA and our group had assembled a team of researchers, academes, authors, domestic violence workers and male victims of domestic violence. Those heading up our group knew Sen Biden on a first name basis but guess what? Not one of our experts was invited to the hearing. The only ones invited were those who were spouting the party line. Those who were willing to only see females as victims and males as perps. I thought I had been transported to North Korea. The opposition was not even given a seat at the table. It was rigged. The VAWA passed unanimously. We are in trouble.

In his latest article Wm. Anderson says "...I still have doubts that the North Carolina Bar Association will do anything more than reprimand [Nifong]"

Can't see it. It's kinda dicey to go to trial now -- what with the threat of perjury, Fed involvement, etc. - but just dropping these charges will surely alienate an important constituency. For many Durham voters (and, of course, feminists), CGM absolutely must retain her victim status. She can do that if she didn't lie voluntarily, she was threatened. By far the easiest way to make that seem credible is to come down very hard on Nifong.

In fact, if Nifong can somehow be tied to CGM's very earliest allegations -- not just as a listener but an author -- then from the POV of the people holding this case, that'll be even better.

This is why we're getting the gov's new criticism of Nifong, plus the bit about how terrible the racial slurs were. Maybe those slurs were so bad they made her feel so violated she thought she literally was.

Anyway, CGM and Durham and feminism, etc. have to be victims of evil mastermind Nifong, nobody else.

6:23AMI believe that CGM first claimed she was raped at Durham Access in response to an as yet unidentified person asking her if she was raped. Tara levicy is the SANE nurse-in-training who later examined CGM at Duke Hospital.

The reason that I fear Nifong only will receive a reprimand is that all of the mechanisms of "law" (sic) are lining up behind him. The feds refuse to look at the case, and the bar (according to Kemp) is going wobbly.

Granted, I believe Nifong should go to prison, and he has committed huge crimes. However, because the State of North Carolina always insists that it is right, I cannot see the state permitting one of its own to go down. Furthermore, having been a prosecutor for nearly 30 years, I am sure that Nifong has plenty on other prosecutors, so in the end they will pull out all stops to protect him.

The only thing that can change that is a wave of negative public opinion. That is why the blogs are so important.

I believe two things, other than PR, could do Nifong in, as far as the Bar goes:

1 - The judge could hold him in contempt for the false DNA statements to the court. The Bar would have to then add additional charges to Nifong.

2 - If the two new DAs on the case issue a statement not just dismissing the charges, but stating that the defendants are innocent and their was not probably cause to indict them (not PC, a long shot). Remember these people will be review and interviewing the major parties. I believe that many will refuse to cooperate on advice on consul.

JLS - Re: 2:59 AM post "O'Reilly: Justice at Duke Link"Thank you so much for that link! It made my day. I almost did not follow the link because I am not a big O'Reilly fan, but this was indeed priceless. You all have got to see this one. Be prepared to laugh your a*s off.Trinity '88

As a threshold matter, anyone who tells you that they believe/doubt the N.C. Bar ASSOCIATION is going to do anything has exposed their ignorance.

I can promise you, as an NC attorney,the N.C. Bar Association is not going to suspend Nifong's license; as a matter of fact I am willing to personally bet my life that will not happen. Any takers on the other side?

The N.C. Bar Association is no sooner going to take action on behalf of the State Government of North Carolina than the A.A.R.P. is going to cut your grandmother's Medicare benefits, and no sooner than the Fraternal Order of Police is going to write you a ticket, or the local high school booster club is going to score a touchdown.

Now, say it with me one time: the North Carolina State Bar is a governmental body, whereas the North Carolina State Bar ASSOCIATION is a voluntary, nongovernmental organization composed of lawyers and paralegals (essentially, a professional "trade group"). Yet four times a day I see in print or in the MSM some talking head tellng me what the "Association" is going to do to Mike Nifong. Can we at least go to the effort to find dilligent phonies to "expertly opine" on the various news outlets?

KC: To be perfectly frank, if Goslee (and to make it even more clear, I have never heard of her previously) has made a material misprepresentation concerning her background, and further made statements that do not reflect truth as to the evidence in this case, she could be guilty of violating MD R. Prof. Cond. 4.1 and 7.1.

Just thought you should know.

As for Silver Spring, that is part of the Socialist People's Republic of Montgomery County. That's the same County that tried to outlaw Santa Clause during a Christmas Parade, and to outlaw people smoking in their own homes. Wonderland indeed. One of their delegates even tried to change Maryland's State Song (which was written during the Civil War). The rest of the state freaked out when she got on the air, and in a perfect New York accent tried to justify herself. I'm sure the Eastern Shore almost had heart failure collectively.

8:41 AM"Maybe those slurs were so bad they made her feel so violated she thought she literally was."

Even worse than words, I'm sure that the FA saw 'hate' in the eyes of the white lacrosse players. This is hard evidence of the hateful thoughts in their minds... proof positive that A HATE CRIME WAS COMMITTED.

I went to Law School at American University, Washington College of Law (Class of '03). If I get any of these facts wrong, bare with me, I haven't lived there since '03.

Surprisingly enough, I lived at West Falkland Chase, in an older apartment complex, about a block away from where Ms. Goslee shows her law office to be. This is a link to a Google of the area.

http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=39.004242,-77.019004&spn=0.11,0.18&t=h

(You will have to zoom in on the correct intersection)

What I find odd, is that from memory, on the north side of the intersection is a Kinko's and a Coffee Shop, on the south side of the intersection is a gas station, on the east side of the intersection is the headquarter of NOAA, and on the west side is an apartment complex with a little bitty grocery store. So, I am not sure where this law office is, unless the Google map on her website is wrong, or she practices out of one of those apartments...

At 9:00 AM, bill anderson said, "[F]urthermore, having been a prosecutor for nearly 30 years, I am sure that Nifong has plenty on other prosecutors, so in the end they will pull out all stops to protect him."

Another deep,dark conspiracy rises from the deep lagoon. Put on your tinfoil hats, men, or the evil, conspiratorial prosecutors will beam "free Nifong" messages into your feeble brains. Connect the dots, connect the dots, all prosecutors are evil conspirators. The world is ending, I tell you.

Dean: Precisely. Shoe box attorney who weasled her way on to television. Her weapons - One milk crate and a laptop.

WC, Chestertown and Judge Price. Good Judge, knows his evidence cold, he would have tossed this case ages ago. Great place to visit BTW readers. It's on the MD Eastern Shore in Kent County. Sort of like a smaller version of Annapolis.

With the politics of Silver Spring being what they are, Goslee fits right in!

After law school, I went to work in a P.A.'s office, and was proud to do so. As a Prosecutor, one has been trusted with a great deal of power, and to see it used is such a cavalier manner really is sad.

No attorney should be willing to condone Nifong's actions in this case, it really violates all standards of decency, at least in my book.

On the National Sexual Violence Resource Center's website in the about NSVRC section:

"This site is supported by Grant/ Cooperative Agreement No. H28/CCH317184-05 from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Its contents are solely the responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official views of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention."

Federal tax dollars being used to propagate false information about the Duke case. Who do I complain to?

"From what I understand, she did not make her claims until Tara Levicy asked her if she had been raped. That did not occur in the parking lot."

Hell, I liked my Kroger parking lot story better, Bill. ;>)

Looks like it was a 'medical facility' after all, but not Levicy's Duke Hospital - it was at Durham Access. Though no DA notes were available (have they ever been produced in discovery?), it stands to reason that she was asked if she was raped at DA - else why would she have been transferred to Duke Hosp for the SANE exam?

10:28: No, it's not just you. I work in govt. as well, and Nifong disgusts me for the simple reason that a govt. attorney should know better. Abuse of power should never be tolerated. I attended CUA for law school.

As for Goslee, I looked her up. Admitted 1973. She has 159 cases in all that time by what I saw (excluding PGCC and MOCOCC). Mainly tort and criminal litigation. She's small fry.

Like him or not, O'Reilly did a number on the Group and Nifong. Yes the clip of Nifong in bathrobe was "priceless". Funny that after wining and dining the media for so long he has become a bit camera shy.

I saw the show with Ann and Georgia. Georgia was so dumb, Ann did not blast her and was very nice. Putting Georgia with Ann Coulter is really shooting fish in a barrel. Ann is brillant. i made a donation to the defense fund early on - will make another. Ten dollars X thousands adds up. Crystal was asked at Durham Access "were you raped?" Not at duke Hospital and not by Nurse Tara.

He charged up, ran though the primary, and hoped sometime down the line to get a lesser plea on something, post November.

I don't think that he figured on these folks really fighting him, or he is just slightly deluded.

I don't think he had any idea of the legs that this story would grow. Probably like someone else involved in this case, when it seemed like a good story would keep them out of trouble.

Again, this abuse of power by a PA is shocking. The actions of the Group of 88 isn't. They and their ilk are driven by race politics. Anyone who has sat through a college course in the last 20 years expects this kind of race-bating drivel from the acadamy. It never ceases to amaze me to recieve letters from the institutions that I have attended asking for donations. I never take the time to reply, but I'm tempted to tell them to dump politically driven programs and if they are still short of money, then call me. Of course, we all know that colleges are always short of funds, right Dr. Ladner?

KC - I am recovering from surgery and watch more news that I want. Have not seen Georgia on MSNBC, but did on Foxx. Emailed bill to leave this nut off the show. Don't watch CNN because of Nancy Disgrace. Also saw Murphy spouting lies about another matter on Fox.

the best thing that can be said of silver spring is: CHRISFIELD SEAFOOD on ga ave, after you've had the stuffed shrimp and seafood bisque, its time to get the hell outa there. best seafood rest. in usa though, no doubt

To Anonymous 9:51 AM"the North Carolina State Bar ASSOCIATION is a voluntary, nongovernmental organization composed of lawyers and paralegals..."

and to Bill Anderson Duke, the Courts, and Hoaxes...but I still have doubts that the North Carolina Bar Association will do anything more than reprimand him, which will permit him to keep his job and to pursue other wrongful convictions.

I agree, any state bar reacts to protect itself, not the victim of attorney corruption and criminal acts. They are advocates of and for attorneys, not you or me.

This case is compelling due to the near-complete lack of justice from the very beginning, and as far into the future we can see, it will remain so to the amazement of all. And yes, this can and does happen to anyone every day. Your tax dollars hard at work.

Thanks to you and others, I will now teach myself how to create the links. But, in the meantime. because the substantive content I referenced was reproduced in the next posting after my 1:16 one, there is no need to jump to the LieStopper site for it. Also, the 3:13 post contains further details about how the taxpayer-funded group is using the screed.gk

You conservatives really crack me up. You take potshots at brilliant, hard-working African-American liberals like Professor Holloway, but you give a pass to overrated black conservatives like Thomas Sowell. Sowell is not a well-respected intellectual, and if you follow the link to his article you'll find that his writing is mediocre, and that he has no original insights on this case.

KC Johnson is also someone who has no original thoughts on this case. His book will shine no added light on this case.

Are you people really trying to argue that Duke shouldn't spend lots of money on brilliant feminist philosophers, as well as brilliant African poets, musicians and writers?

The poor, beaten-down Caucasian just can't get it through its head that other cultures--and races--are surpassing you.

Keep on blogging. My highly paid job at Duke is secure, and I've earned the salary I earn. I owe no one an apology.

Of course Thomas Sowell isn't well-respected. He's a black man who believes in individual rights. Name one such man who is well-respected. His goal is not to provide original insight into the case--there's a consensus among people familiar with and interested in the evidence. His goal is to further the situation's publicity.

KC provides plenty of original insight, but his purpose, likewise, is to explain the situation as it is, not to provide a unique viewpoint or to be the first to hold an opinion.

Other races are surpassing Caucasians? I (a Caucasian) really don't care, because that's not how I categorize people. If you want to categorize people according to race, more power to you. You should have the courage to put your name to your convictions, "Guess Who."

I encourage you to point out any insight KH has had into this situation, or any point on which KC has been comparably wrong. I'd also encourage you to point to where anyone has suggested that Duke shouldn't spend money on brilliant African poets, musicians, or writers.

Of course, it's possible that, just as you won't stick your name to your opinion, you won't stick any arguments to it, either. I'd say it's even likely.

to 3:35 You Sir, are simply wrong. No one is arguing Duke (or any other University) should not pursue brillant people in their field. It is imperative however, that they have honor and integrity as well, something KC Johnson seems to exude, and something many faculty at Duke seem to lack. Race is not the issue, right and wrong is.

Are you people really trying to argue that Duke shouldn't spend lots of money on brilliant feminist philosophers, as well as brilliant African poets, musicians and writers?

How about just spending money on brilliant philosophers, poets, musicians and writers, without the other modifiers? (Though I do rather shudder, given the state of modern poetry, as to who would be seen as a brilliant poet.) The selected modifiers, "feminist" and "African" imply that a decision has already been made, without real reference to the preceeding modifier of "brilliant."

Joe Bingham---For some examples of Karla Holloway's "scholarship" google her name and take a ride.Or google an AA publication called "Chicken Bones: A Journal".This woman is an abcess of racism on society.

"I'm still here. Do you agree with me, or not? I'm not a "troll," if that means that I'm being duplicitous.

Thank you."

No, I mean that you are asking numerous ridiculous questions that must be answered by us or you will not allow us to 'pass.' And God help us all if you actually are a member of the professoriate at Duke. Chafe? Wood? It's me, your well-educated student, D....

"For these reasons, the public's awareness of evidence is almost always favorable to the accused and far from a fulldisclosure of the truth"

Hardly. I believe that the majority of the public believes that if one is indicted, then they are guilty. However, lets say that the above is true. There IS a presumed innocence due the defendants, in ANY trial, unless and until the prosecutor provides evidence to the contrary. So who CARES if all the pre-trial publicity makes the defendants look innocent? That IS the basis of our courts, no? That they ARE innocent, until proven guilty? This complaint is ridiculous.

As for Goslee, I looked her up. Admitted 1973. She has 159 cases in all that time by what I saw (excluding PGCC and MOCOCC). Mainly tort and criminal litigation. She's small fry.

I am fairly sure she was a candidate for a judgeship in Baltimore City in 1982 or 1983, around the time the "Circuit Court" was assembled from a passel of more specialized tribunals. I seem to recall it was a Circuit Court plebiscite but that her campaign posters may have said "Supreme Bench", one of the antecedent courts and that The Sun opposed her candidacy. Esquire, is it not so that she would have had to have a probationary gubernatorial appointment before facing the electorate? Is my memory a jumble on this point?

In 1985 or 1986 she was advertising her law practice on late night television in Baltimore.

If she is practicing out of an apartment in Silver Spring twenty-odd years later, it seems as if her career has been something of a disappointment.

This wrap-up on Goslee is just another indication that it doesn't take much to get a JD at some institutions of "higher" learning. Maybe Maryland was below the line in filling their quota for imbeciles the day she applied.

Also has anyone done research to see if she's cashed any checks from Mikey?

I think most of you are being spoofed. I suppose it is POSSIBLE that someone could be so benighted, but it is certainly not PROBABLE, not even among the faculty at Duke.

Of course, it could be a spoof spoof, trying to get those commenting to make a really foolish response. Now THAT would be subtle, but so far the pro-Nifong crowd have manged to eschew subtlety in favor of fatuousness.

Interesting that on her web page under "Attorneys" (of which she appears to be the only one), the biography section claims she was a "Professor of Law, Geneva, Switzerland". Note though that the page titled "Professional Profile" doesn't mention a stint in academia. She probably taught a seminar at a health club in Geneva and went on to label herself a professor.

I was in Georgia's class at UMD Law School and we received a very good, traditional legal education. The class of 1973 was the first one with a "significant" number of women (10%). What everyone seems to miss is the fact that being a federal prosecutor in no way makes you an expert in rape cases. Unless a rape occurs on federal property, they are prosecuted in state court. I can't recall the last time a rape was tried in federal court. They go more towards drugs, guns, white collar, etc. I seem to recall that Georgia did criminal law and that she may have run for judge years ago. I was as surprised as anyone to see her pop up as a prosecution expert--I would have thought the reverse. I am of the opinion that half the time these pundits don't believe a word they are saying and are basically just playing a role.

Nifong just used these men as political pawns, diverting the attention away from the more serious crimes, most committed by people of power, and law enforcement!

Why was there never any arrests made at the La Zona?! Which is more important, exposing massive corruption by city officials, or using innocent citizens to mask their hidden agenda!

Why have people cared more about the guilt or innocence of an alleged rape of a prostitute?! There have been numerous, heinous unsolved murders, and I am shocked the media has not been forthcoming about the real scandals, and expose and prosecute the "REAL," villians!

What has become of the women at the La Zona who were enslaved into prostitution?!

Were any of the people mentioned on the FBI "sting," tape ever notified that they were targets?!

Are they still trafficking cocaine, and counterfeiting?!

And these are just a few crimes where the guilty were sent free, and with a paycheck?!

DURHAM -- Two former Durham County sheriff's deputies fired in the aftermath of a drug-related sting at a Durham nightclub last October are not being held criminally responsible, but a third former deputy - -- the then-owner of the club -- has pleaded guilty to drug charges and will be sentenced Aug. 10. Former deputy Michael Paul Owens pleaded guilty last month to maintaining the La Zona nightclub at 2825 North Roxboro Road as an establishment for the sale of drugs and conspiracy to traffic cocaine, Assistant U.S. Attorney Sandra Hairston said Wednesday. Hairston said Owens could be sentenced to up to 20 years in federal prison.

Owens and six other men were arrested in an Oct. 13 raid at La Zona. Five ounces of cocaine were confiscated during the raid.

Owens is the only person to date to have been charged in connection with the alleged trafficking conspiracy. Hairston declined to say whether charges against more people will be filed.

The two former deputies who lost their jobs -- William "Keith" Dodson and Brad King -- had moonlighted as security guards at La Zona. They were fired after the raid for violating the Sheriff's Office secondary employment policy, Sheriff's Office Captain Paul Martin said Wednesday. Martin said the October raid cut short an undercover probe of alleged criminal activity at the club. That investigation was believed to be much more wide-ranging than the eventual drug case built against Owens and any possible unnamed co-conspirators.

Law enforcement reportedly made its move after evidence surfaced that Owens and perhaps some others were planning an armed robbery. Search warrants linked to the La Zona raid alleged that vehicles and people seen frequenting the club were known to be involved in a wide array of criminal activities, including "drug trafficking, armed robberies, murder ( for hire ), prostitution and human trafficking."

On Oct. 12, 2006, investigators orchestrated what law enforcement referred to as a controlled buy at the nightclub.

Investigators gave a confidential informant cash to buy several ounces of cocaine to be used as evidence that the establishment was the site of drug trafficking, Martin said.

During the exchange, investigators got more than they bargained for when the informant was allegedly asked to return the following night with a gun. The informant, Martin said, was asked to participate in a planned home invasion and robbery. Owens, Martin added, could be heard offering the informant a weapon to use.

Because investigators had learned of possible violence, they cut their probe short and decided to charge Owens solely on the basis of the drug evidence because, Martin said, they did not have enough information to advance the other charges.

Martin said he felt justice has been served in Owens' case. "We took it as far as we could," he said.

He added that the La Zona incident and a current Sheriff's Office investigation into a former employee's alleged embezzlement of county funds should be considered "aberrations."

"We've had two unfortunate incidents in the dozen or so years under Sheriff [Worth] Hill," Martin said. "Whenever you have an organization made up of human beings you're going to have mistakes. We're handling those mistakes and we're doing the best we can."

The Power Of Blogging! Durham Is YOUR town too!I ask you all to also request an Investigation into the DPD, and Sheriff’s Department, and why nothing is being done about the unsolved murders?! Not only my brother but also a recent triple homicide, Janet Araboa, Michelle Young, and who knows how many others!

Our cases have been kicked to the curb, and 2 years have come and gone without not even being important, but disgustingly neglected! Nifong is hard from being the sole villain, his league is quite enormous and encompasses many others in positions of authority who have also abused their offices!

There needs to be INVESTIGATIONS, and REFORM! Anything less will accomplish nothing! Nifong is by far the first politician to succumb to abject corruption! Every day is another story of another crooked members of government caught in everything from murder to fraud in office!The entire scope of the matter is that Durham has become like Carson City in the “Old West!” Lawlessness is the rule rather than the exception!

The Governor needs to be told that “WE” as in “THE PEOPLE” DEMAND accountability, and “WE” will expect NOTHING less than a thorough review by FEDERAL INVESTIGATORS!

Set a PRESIDENT! Durham is not just in North Carolina, but is in each of our United States! Let “OUR” government KNOW that “WE” will not continue to condone anarchy within our own homeland, brought upon us by “ROGUE” officials!The very word ROGUE does not begin to even touch the surface of what really lies beneath! ROGUE is a compliment compared to what they really are! And that is depraved individuals who care only for their own gain and agendas, are veritably let go with a slap to the hand, and defile the oaths they swore upon to uphold!All they have UPHELD is their own self interest and those of their cronies, meanwhile OUR rights are abused, neglected, disrespected, ignored, and denied!”

“WE” the people have been vehemently denied our voices and rights to be heard! NO family should be forced into bankruptcy in order for us to have “RIGHTS” to be heard to the courts! This nation was NOT made so that legal affairs would be forever drug on by lawyers in it for their own gain! I am disgusted our country has become so defiled!MANY of our loved ones have, and are serving in the military so that “WE” may have our freedom and our rights!

“WE” must STAND TOGETHER, massively call, and bother to send by certified mail thousands of letters telling them we will accept NOTHING less! “THEY” work for us! A third of our wages goes into the support of our country! “WE” elect these people! To look the other way is not just giving in, it is cowardice, IMO.

What more fitting detriment to our millions of war dead to know that the flag they bled, and died for is nothing more than a piece of cloth woven in a communist country by enslaved women and children, only because we care about the cheapest cost regardless of it’s price, and leave out “One Nation, (UNDER GOD)?!?!

I am sure they are shaking their heads and saying, THESE are OUR descendants?! Just remember our “ROOTS AND OUR RIGHTS” and there is very much power within UNITY!

If ever there was a reason in time for “US” to gather in order to speak our pleas, it was YESTERDAY! It is simple, just mail the Governor, your state representative, and local councilman! Get the ball rolling! Faxes and certified mail is the best route to go, unregistered seems to have quite a knack for becoming “lost?” Also CALL! If I had not called and kept calling I would NEVER have even hope of ANYTHING EVER being done to convict my brothers murderer!

We all think, “What does MY opinion matter?” Just remember this, THOUSANDS of us joined as a TEAM is the only way there will EVER be CHANGE, and HOPE!Respectfully,Rhonda FlemingCleveland Ohio

Blog Awards

About Me

I am from Higgins Beach, in Scarborough, Maine, six miles south of Portland. After spending five years as track announcer at Scarborough Downs, I left to study fulltime in graduate school, where my advisor was Akira Iriye. I have a B.A. and Ph.D. from Harvard, and an M.A. from the University of Chicago. At Brooklyn College and the CUNY Graduate Center, I teach classes in 20th century US political, constitutional, and diplomatic history; in 2007-8, I was Fulbright Distinguished Chair for the Humanities at Tel Aviv University.

Book

Comments Policy

(1) Comments are moderated, but with the lightest of touches, to exclude only off-topic comments or obviously racist or similar remarks.

(2) My clearing a comment implies neither that I agree nor that I disagree with the comment. My opinion is expressed in my words and my words only. Since this blog has more than 1500 posts, and since I at least occasionally comment myself, the blog provides more than enough material for readers to discern my opinions.

(3) If a reader finds an offensive comment, I urge the reader to e-mail me; if the comment is offensive, I will gladly delete it.

(4) Commenters who either misrepresent their identity or who engage in obvious troll behavior will not have their comments cleared. Troll-like behavior includes, but is not limited to: repeatedly linking to off-topic sites; repeatedly asking questions that already have been answered; offering unsubstantiated remarks whose sole purpose appears to be inflaming other commenters.

"From the Scottsboro Boys to Clarence Gideon, some of the most memorable legal narratives have been tales of the wrongly accused. Now “Until Proven Innocent,” a new book about the false allegations of rape against three Duke lacrosse players, can join these galvanizing cautionary tales . . , Taylor and Johnson have made a gripping contribution to the literature of the wrongly accused. They remind us of the importance of constitutional checks on prosecutorial abuse. And they emphasize the lesson that Duke callously advised its own students to ignore: if you’re unjustly suspected of any crime, immediately call the best lawyer you can afford."--Jeffrey Rosen, New York Times Book Review